1993 Mitchell Luger - Page 2

ithacaartist · 02-25-2012, 02:56 PM

I'm not sure the filing will help, as it would present even less material on the tip, vertically--If filed down, it won't stick up as far as it did to begin with. Rather than modifying a bunch of mags to work, I'd consider having your friendly neighborhood TIG welder to add a bead or two of new material to the tip of the holdopen, and then file to reshape back into a wedge. This will restore both the sharpness (which I'm not that sure is important) and the effective height to which it will rise.

chromeed · 02-25-2012, 09:37 PM

I will wait and see if Jim's filing works, if it does not we can have some material welded to the Hold open lever it looks like my 1936 sticks up almost 2mm higher than the SS one.
David thanks for the advice on the Tig Welding, the Hold open lever on ebay is up to $95 now with 2 days left Welding should be much less.
Ed Reimbold

alanint · 02-26-2012, 12:06 PM

You don't really need to go through all that. With the top barrel/extention completely off the pistol, insert an empty magazine into the frame and see how far up the mag button pushes the hold-open. If it does not come up at all or only slightly, try another magazine and see what happens. If there is a marked difference in HO height with the second mag, then the first mag is either seating too low or the button has isssues.

ithacaartist · 02-26-2012, 09:02 PM

Doug,
I sort of agree. (This is basically what I suggested back at the bottom of the first page in this thread!)

Initially, I was trying to see if the tip of the holdopen could be made to rise to effective height to catch the breech block securely each time, by whatever means--different mags, a finger from below, etc. However, the photos of the Mitchell next to the 1936 original Luger definitely show a difference between the tips of the two respective holdopens, with what does look like wear on the SS one. Add Jim's comment that the Mitchell's rides 2 mm lower compared to the '36... For this, there is one more thing to check, and that's how high the tip will ride in these mag comparisons. Multiple mags should give one set of measurements, and holding it up manually, pushed up to its limit in travel by a finger or tool would give a dimension for the max possible height. This may confirm whether or not it is even able to rise to a mechanically dependable height. If its height is marginal, when pressed manually to its limit, then one could add as much temporary meat to a follower button as possible--after which adding any more dimension would have the sole effect of not allowing the mag body to click into the mag catch/release button--and still have no effect because the holdopen, already at its limit of travel, cannot rise further. If this is the case, then it may be bent (SS alloy used not as hard as the original steel, therefore could bend), or simply require the extra material welded on to put the tip up where it should be.

The wear of the holdopen's tip indicates that the breech block has been scrubbing on it at the point of operation at which it encounters the breech block which is trying to return to battery. A sharp edge or point influences the binary(one or the other, period) situation necessary for the mechanical connection (holding the action open), or lack of mechanical connection (not holding the action open).

Just the same as the corner on the lug of the firing pin and the corner of the catch on the sear. The corners are stoned just enough to remove any burr or roughness in order that the release be smooth, but still should be quite sharp, so that there is no middle ground--the catches are either caught or not. Rounded corners will make engagement/release somewhat unpredictable because the slight radius will provide middle ground and allow less than positive (binary) behavior of the parts related. Perhaps the trigger pull experts will agree that the greater the radius on these former sharp corners, the wackier the pull and release will feel, up until the point, potentially, of full auto.

I'm curious as to whether this issue would become worse over time. I'm thinking it would.

alanint · 02-26-2012, 09:15 PM

Excellent points, David!

It all seems to go back to poor metallurgy and poor tolerances on the SS Lugers. Rounded edges where a nice, straight cut is expected, etc.
I bought a 1992 Mitchell, at the same time my son was born, in the hopes of giving it to him as an heirloom. Test firings led to a number of frustrations, (I am an invererate tinkerer as well and pride myself on getting almost anything to work). I eventually gave up on this Luger as not worth the trouble. I simply could not remake the entire gun!
My son will get something else as an heirloom.
Sad...the SS Lugers were a cool idea when they came out.

padredan · 02-26-2012, 10:13 PM

Totaly agree. The one i owned sure looked cool, but i to gave up on it.

jhgillette · 02-28-2012, 01:39 PM

Worked better last night with one mag especially, until the gun got fouled. I think I had to much oil on the pistol and everything became problematic after around 50 rounds, but it worked initially perfect. So I think its a combinations of several things. I still have some more mags I want to try, some with a larger side button to see if that helps....

saab-bob · 03-03-2012, 12:23 AM

Hello Gents
This discussion of hold-opens on the Mitchell SS Luger prompted me to go look at mine.

Here is a pic of my Mitchell hold-open with the magazine inserted. I notice mine sticks up alot more then the one previously posted.Mine never seems to have a hold-open problem after the last shot.Looking closely at my hold-open,it may even be a steel replacement?

Awhile back there was some discussion about the metallurgy of these guns. As you can see mine does have some deformation on the ears. I can't find any other areas of metal problems.
My deformation probably happened when I was taking the advice of so called experts"only shoot hot loads of 9mm,that is what gun was designed for!"

Bob

sheepherder · 03-03-2012, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhgillette

Thanks a again, just looked up Lubraplate grease and there is a lot to choose from. Which specific do you use?

A bit off-topic, but on all my SS handguns, I use LSA as a lubricant. It's what the military uses on the M-16's (and others) where you have metals prone to galling. You can find it at any gunshow, in various containers. Green bottles, white bottles, it's a white-ish semi-solid/semi-grease and only a thin film is required.

...My $.02...

alvin · 03-03-2012, 06:50 AM

Could it because the magazine spring being too weak? German Luger magazine has very strong spring, which pushes ammo and the side thumb button up fast. If this spring is not strong enough, the gun may marginally work.

glock30 · 05-10-2012, 08:34 PM

The hold open is the exact same thing as the German P-08. And get a MecGar magazine for this. Regrdless of them all made by the same company, as the name went from Aimco to SPM, production improved, they had to work the bugs out of them like anything else. I had a real firing pin in mine and a realhold open, basically all parts interchanged. I had no problems with mine except the hold open, I didn't care about it, it worked after I put a mecgar mag in it.

Vlim · 05-11-2012, 04:45 PM

The surface of the frame ears of the original pistols was hardened (so were those of the post war Mauser Parabellums). Aimco/SPM/Orimar probably never bothered to copy that feature.

The holdopen has to 'catch' behind a shallow cutout in the bottom of the breech block. I would check that area for wear as well, I can image that, because of the relative softness of the stainless steel, the breech block cutout will also wear, allowing the breech block to 'hop over' the hold open. A weak hold open spring will also allow this.

HisSoldier · 05-13-2012, 12:11 AM

Quote:

the Springfield is made of a much berrer grade of SS

We make stainless parts for some guns, the alloy is 416 half hard material, preheat treated. I believe 416 is the most common alloys used for guns, that and 17-4 PH. These are heat treatable alloys, and can be made reasonably hard. There are other special alloys used for casting, and I think of Ruger and what they have done with stainless castings, great stuff.

Consider the 1911. As originally designed some areas, and some entire parts, need to be pretty hard, and it's hard to get these alloys to the required hardnesses. We accept a little tradeoff for the joy of corrosion resistance, stainless steels are just not as good as alloy steels in severe stress areas, period.

But I get the idea that the Houston guns are not using the best stainless alloys, just from what I've read. Is that possible?

glock30 · 05-13-2012, 01:47 PM

I had one that never did that and I put 1000+ through it. Some are fine, you won't see one marked SPM do this or Stoeger, even though it is the same company.

02-25-2012, 09:37 PM	#22
chromeed User Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North Georgia Posts: 81 Thanks: 1 Thanked 27 Times in 9 Posts	I will wait and see if Jim's filing works, if it does not we can have some material welded to the Hold open lever it looks like my 1936 sticks up almost 2mm higher than the SS one. David thanks for the advice on the Tig Welding, the Hold open lever on ebay is up to $95 now with 2 days left Welding should be much less. Ed Reimbold __________________ Ed Reimbold I Need: For my 1936 P-08 Mag #5800 will trade Mag Al Stamped Blue #6859 k Straight Eagle 655 & #3502 n+St Eagle 63 For my 1917 Artillary Wood Mag #9220 I have #3392 f +

02-26-2012, 10:13 PM	#26
padredan User Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: louisiana Now, but from the Rebublic of Texas Posts: 937 Thanks: 429 Thanked 316 Times in 182 Posts	Totaly agree. The one i owned sure looked cool, but i to gave up on it. __________________ In this world nothing is free, except the grace of God

02-28-2012, 01:39 PM	#27
jhgillette User Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Gig Harbor, WA Posts: 12 Thanks: 3 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Worked better last night with one mag especially, until the gun got fouled. I think I had to much oil on the pistol and everything became problematic after around 50 rounds, but it worked initially perfect. So I think its a combinations of several things. I still have some more mags I want to try, some with a larger side button to see if that helps.... __________________ Thanks, looking for Mag. 2241-k.

03-03-2012, 12:23 AM	#28
saab-bob User Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: So Cal Posts: 459 Thanks: 774 Thanked 143 Times in 87 Posts	Hello Gents This discussion of hold-opens on the Mitchell SS Luger prompted me to go look at mine. Here is a pic of my Mitchell hold-open with the magazine inserted. I notice mine sticks up alot more then the one previously posted.Mine never seems to have a hold-open problem after the last shot.Looking closely at my hold-open,it may even be a steel replacement? Awhile back there was some discussion about the metallurgy of these guns. As you can see mine does have some deformation on the ears. I can't find any other areas of metal problems. My deformation probably happened when I was taking the advice of so called experts"only shoot hot loads of 9mm,that is what gun was designed for!" Bob Attached Thumbnails __________________ "I think,therefore I own guns"

02-25-2012, 02:56 PM	#21
ithacaartist Twice a Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Atop the highest hill in Schuyler County NY Posts: 3,377 Thanks: 7,452 Thanked 2,613 Times in 1,380 Posts	I'm not sure the filing will help, as it would present even less material on the tip, vertically--If filed down, it won't stick up as far as it did to begin with. Rather than modifying a bunch of mags to work, I'd consider having your friendly neighborhood TIG welder to add a bead or two of new material to the tip of the holdopen, and then file to reshape back into a wedge. This will restore both the sharpness (which I'm not that sure is important) and the effective height to which it will rise.

02-26-2012, 12:06 PM	#23
alanint User Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Marco Island, Florida Posts: 4,867 Thanks: 1,685 Thanked 1,917 Times in 1,193 Posts	You don't really need to go through all that. With the top barrel/extention completely off the pistol, insert an empty magazine into the frame and see how far up the mag button pushes the hold-open. If it does not come up at all or only slightly, try another magazine and see what happens. If there is a marked difference in HO height with the second mag, then the first mag is either seating too low or the button has isssues.

02-26-2012, 09:02 PM	#24
ithacaartist Twice a Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Atop the highest hill in Schuyler County NY Posts: 3,377 Thanks: 7,452 Thanked 2,613 Times in 1,380 Posts	Doug, I sort of agree. (This is basically what I suggested back at the bottom of the first page in this thread!) Initially, I was trying to see if the tip of the holdopen could be made to rise to effective height to catch the breech block securely each time, by whatever means--different mags, a finger from below, etc. However, the photos of the Mitchell next to the 1936 original Luger definitely show a difference between the tips of the two respective holdopens, with what does look like wear on the SS one. Add Jim's comment that the Mitchell's rides 2 mm lower compared to the '36... For this, there is one more thing to check, and that's how high the tip will ride in these mag comparisons. Multiple mags should give one set of measurements, and holding it up manually, pushed up to its limit in travel by a finger or tool would give a dimension for the max possible height. This may confirm whether or not it is even able to rise to a mechanically dependable height. If its height is marginal, when pressed manually to its limit, then one could add as much temporary meat to a follower button as possible--after which adding any more dimension would have the sole effect of not allowing the mag body to click into the mag catch/release button--and still have no effect because the holdopen, already at its limit of travel, cannot rise further. If this is the case, then it may be bent (SS alloy used not as hard as the original steel, therefore could bend), or simply require the extra material welded on to put the tip up where it should be. The wear of the holdopen's tip indicates that the breech block has been scrubbing on it at the point of operation at which it encounters the breech block which is trying to return to battery. A sharp edge or point influences the binary(one or the other, period) situation necessary for the mechanical connection (holding the action open), or lack of mechanical connection (not holding the action open). Just the same as the corner on the lug of the firing pin and the corner of the catch on the sear. The corners are stoned just enough to remove any burr or roughness in order that the release be smooth, but still should be quite sharp, so that there is no middle ground--the catches are either caught or not. Rounded corners will make engagement/release somewhat unpredictable because the slight radius will provide middle ground and allow less than positive (binary) behavior of the parts related. Perhaps the trigger pull experts will agree that the greater the radius on these former sharp corners, the wackier the pull and release will feel, up until the point, potentially, of full auto. I'm curious as to whether this issue would become worse over time. I'm thinking it would.

02-26-2012, 09:15 PM	#25
alanint User Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Marco Island, Florida Posts: 4,867 Thanks: 1,685 Thanked 1,917 Times in 1,193 Posts	Excellent points, David! It all seems to go back to poor metallurgy and poor tolerances on the SS Lugers. Rounded edges where a nice, straight cut is expected, etc. I bought a 1992 Mitchell, at the same time my son was born, in the hopes of giving it to him as an heirloom. Test firings led to a number of frustrations, (I am an invererate tinkerer as well and pride myself on getting almost anything to work). I eventually gave up on this Luger as not worth the trouble. I simply could not remake the entire gun! My son will get something else as an heirloom. Sad...the SS Lugers were a cool idea when they came out.

03-03-2012, 06:50 AM	#30
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	Could it because the magazine spring being too weak? German Luger magazine has very strong spring, which pushes ammo and the side thumb button up fast. If this spring is not strong enough, the gun may marginally work.

05-10-2012, 08:34 PM	#31
glock30 User Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Obama LAND Posts: 206 Thanks: 18 Thanked 17 Times in 14 Posts	The hold open is the exact same thing as the German P-08. And get a MecGar magazine for this. Regrdless of them all made by the same company, as the name went from Aimco to SPM, production improved, they had to work the bugs out of them like anything else. I had a real firing pin in mine and a realhold open, basically all parts interchanged. I had no problems with mine except the hold open, I didn't care about it, it worked after I put a mecgar mag in it.

05-11-2012, 04:45 PM	#32
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,053 Thanks: 1,036 Thanked 3,990 Times in 1,205 Posts	The surface of the frame ears of the original pistols was hardened (so were those of the post war Mauser Parabellums). Aimco/SPM/Orimar probably never bothered to copy that feature. The holdopen has to 'catch' behind a shallow cutout in the bottom of the breech block. I would check that area for wear as well, I can image that, because of the relative softness of the stainless steel, the breech block cutout will also wear, allowing the breech block to 'hop over' the hold open. A weak hold open spring will also allow this.

05-13-2012, 01:47 PM	#34
glock30 User Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Obama LAND Posts: 206 Thanks: 18 Thanked 17 Times in 14 Posts	I had one that never did that and I put 1000+ through it. Some are fine, you won't see one marked SPM do this or Stoeger, even though it is the same company.